The drugs have worn off. Dr. Jekyll and Orrin Hatch takes a stand against Clinton

sbryce

New member
From the Deseret News: http://www.desnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,155012067,00.html?

WASHINGTON - Sen. Orrin Hatch came out shooting Wednesday at a tool he says President Clinton uses unfairly to push gun control: suing gunmakers whose weapons are later used in crimes.

Hatch, R-Utah, introduced a bill to ban such lawsuits. He said the administration has joined them merely to "extort" concessions from gunmakers, such as a deal Friday with Smith & Wesson to include trigger locks and other safety devices on its guns.

"Let's call it what the federal lawsuit really is: extortion. It is an attempt to bypass the legislative process and the Constitution to achieve a gun-control agenda that the public's elected officials oppose," Hatch said.

He added such suits make "it seem that the administration is doing something" about gun violence. But "the record makes clear the administration has done little to enforce the federal laws on the books against gun-wielding criminals."

Hatch said the suit simply "masks the truth. The administration has been inept in preventing gun violence" and is making noise on the issue only for political purposes. The bill is just the latest round in fierce battles over gun control, which hit high gear last month after a 6-year-old in Michigan shot and killed a first-grade classmate.

Hatch has charged that Clinton is using outcry over the incident to push unfair gun control, and has resisted urging from Clinton to reconvene a House-Senate conference to work out differences in a juvenile justice bill amended to include many gun provisions.

When Hatch said he was thinking of stripping all gun provisions out of that bill and running them separately - so they wouldn't delay anti-gang and other issues in the bill - Clinton vowed to veto the legislation.

So Hatch told the Senate Wednesday he has essentially decided that the best political defense for gun advocates is a good offense - and his new bill is the first piece of that.

"I have become convinced that . . . it is not enough to simply oppose the gun control community's legislative agenda," Hatch said.

Instead, he called for allies to "redouble our efforts and set out to pass an affirmative legislative agenda, which safeguards the right to keep and bear arms."

Hatch called his new bill the "Right to Keep and Bear Arms Protection and Privacy Act." Besides banning lawsuits against gunmakers whose weapons are misused in crimes, it also bans any fee for background checks on gun purchasers, and requires forms they file to be destroyed once the check is complete.

Hatch bitterly criticized the administration's recent deal with Smith & Wesson. He said the company was forced into a settlement because owners trying to sell it could not find buyers with the lawsuits against it pending.

He complained the company was also given an unfair bonus once it settled. "It was announced on Saturday that HUD (the Department of Housing and Urban Development) and the mayors of Atlanta, Detroit and Miami directed their law enforcement agencies to give preferences to Smith & Wesson when purchasing firearms.

"This is outrageous. Not only does this deal undercut the Second Amendment, it undercuts the principle of competitive bidding. It creates an incentive that taxpayers will be gouged. It punished innocent firearms manufacturers," Hatch said.


------------------
Those who carried materials did their work with one hand and held a weapon in the other, and each of the builders wore his sword at his side as he worked.
Nehemiah 4:17,18
 
Sen.Orrin Hatch
Office of Senator Orrin Hatch
131 Russell Building
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510-4402
Telephone: (202) 224-5251
Fax: (202) 224-6331
 
That's Hatch for you; Came back to our side when it became obvious we weren't dead, but he's picked a fight he knows he'll lose, because Clinton will veto the bill. This way he gets the best of both worlds; Gets seen to be our ally when we're going into an election all riled up, but the other side actually gets to win.


------------------
Sic semper tyrannis!
 
Brett,

The ultimate expression of cynicism, of course, is to do nothing, because you believe that those who are fighting are weak or duplicitous. You concede the battle before it is lost.

I just faxed my thank you to Sen. Hatch.

Re: the comment that he's a shameless politico... He has lots of company. Unfortunately, they are the ones who pass the laws, so we have to try to exploit them to our advantage. The squeeky wheel gets the grease. Let's not squeak like mice, let's roar like lions.

[This message has been edited by Covert Mission (edited March 22, 2000).]
 
I like to think that we had something to do with his "new found religion", when we faxed and emailed him "reminding" him of his position on RKBA in his prelude to the Senate Report on RKBA of 1982. (I know, fat chance. ;) )

The guy's a shameless politico, as they all are. We should never trust any of them, and must always remain vigilant and hold their feet to the fire.

Otherwise, those who do will win.
 
I may not exactly trust Hatch, but I commend him for saying something! The rest of Congress has been hiding under their desks waiting for poll data since Clinton usurped their legislative prerogative and basically slapped their faces with the S&W agreement. Congress--Democrat as well as Republican--ought to be utterly outraged by the agreement. Instead, Congress is lying low. I'd like to see other Senators and Representatives join Hatch in a chorus of protest. Will it happen? Not as long as they're cowed by the media. My $0.02.
 
Covert: Don't get me wrong; I'm delighted. The most sensitive political windvane in Washington just swung in our direction, and that wouldn't have happened if we weren't doing something right. And it DOES do us some good to have a prominent Republican saying stuff in our favor publicly.

It's just that my profession is engineering, and it just does NOT pay in this line of work to pretend that you're working with aviation grade titanium, when somebody's handed you a chunk of low grade zinc. I'm moderately familiar with Hatch's record in Congress, and he is NOT to be trusted; He's one of those guys who's only too glad to be seen fighting the good fight, but who would just as soon see to it that he's fighting a LOSING fight.

To give just one example, about half of Clinton's judicial appointments, (Enemies of the Second amendment all.) got confirmed without any debate, because Hatch sneaks into the Senate when nobody is around, and gets them confirmed on a voice vote!

Now, this bill he's come up with to stop the lawsuits is so narrowly tailored that it will NOT get the support of all the other industries that are quaking in their boots about the trial lawyers coming after them next. So they won't have the backing to override a veto. A general tort reform bill which protected the firearms companies might have had a shot at becoming law.

And then he goes on to ban fees which there's no statutory authority to levy, and to ban the retention of files several laws already ban the retention of. You know, when this bill gets beat, our enemies will be able to argue in court that nobody would have tried to ban retaining those records if it weren't legal to retain them to begin with?

------------------
Sic semper tyrannis!
 
Does this mean the jackass is going to drop all the extensive gun control from the juve (in)justice bill, or promise to not back it if not removed? Or not?

Looks like Hatch himself is trying to play smoke and mirrors to please the pro-gun constituencies of his state. Oregonians: Write this two-faced jerk and tell him to quit wasting time talking about stuff and actually DO something - oppose his own bill, which GOA calls Hatch's Horror Bill - or at least oppose it until the various gun control provisions are removed from it.

Someone tell me if I'm off-base here.
 
OK, I'm very glad he switched again. As somebody said, half of Washington just follows the best noses in town to whatever side they think will win, and Hatch is one of the noses, despicable and soulless human chia pet though he may be.

BUT--this bill is probably unconstitutional anyway. Banning lawsuits just doesn't sound like it would pass anybody's Constitution test. I dunno for sure, not having read the bill.
Too bad the provision about requiring destruction of 4473s after the background check is tagged on such a loser--that's not a bad idea.
 
What are you guys complaining about?

I'm surprised by this myself. . . . Hatch has cleaned up his act.

He did what he said - he's destroying the bill from the inside.

That "juvenile justice" bill has strength because part of it deals with young criminals. . . . some will sign it because the pluses outweigh the minuses.

Do you know what happens if Klint doesn't veto it? Most of the support for the original bill will be gone.

That's how they passed the a/w ban, attaching it to a "crime" bill. It wouldn't have had the same support if "ban high-caps" was on its own.

All Hatch has to do is split the two bills up. Klint threatens to veto it because he WANTS the gun control stuck onto it, the gun control can't carry itself.

By vetoing the juvenile justice bill Klint gets to say "the repubs didn't give me a good enough crime bill". Who gets the blame is anyone's guess.

But the gun control is history on its own, imho.

Battler.
 
Brent: Points well-taken. I am somewhat aware of Hatch's posturing and shiftiness, but should know more. I appreciate the information here.

Ever heard the quote "Every people gets the government it deserves." What have we done to deserve some of these "soulless chia pets"? [ :) :) ROFL ] To paraphrase: "Hatch (or insert your favorite chia here) is willing to fight to the last drop of someone elses blood"

Upside: This blackmail by Klinton is becoming known. God help us that people will see it for what it is.

[This message has been edited by Covert Mission (edited March 22, 2000).]
 
Battler: Hatch didn't clean up his act, he just changed his spots for a moment. That's good, because for a few fleeting moments he's on our side, saying what needs to be said. It's good because it shows that this guy with a bionic finger to the wind figures we're winning, and he hopped on the wagon with us. It's good because it may kill this monstrosity of a bill HE created.

But mark my words, do NOT turn your back on Hatch. He's not taking our side in this because he's had some change of heart, it's sheer political opportunism. The instant, the very instant, that he thinks he can get away with it, he'll sink the knife to the hilt. Because that's what he's always done, and always will do. Particularly, keep a close watch on him during the lame duck session after the election; Scum like Hatch are at their most dangerous when they figure they've got the most time for us to forget they betrayed us.

------------------
Sic semper tyrannis!
 
Covert: What did we do? We got lazy, and neglected to fertilize the tree of liberty. So they stopped fearing us.

------------------
Sic semper tyrannis!
 
Brett: Absolutely. It was a rhetorical question, but when so many people, many of them gun owners, don't even vote much less ever send an e-mail or fax to lawmakers, we have one answer right there.

"We have met the enemy and he is us." Too many people far more worried about how high the Nasdaq is. As if wealth equals freedom.

[This message has been edited by Covert Mission (edited March 22, 2000).]
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Brett Bellmore:
Hatch didn't clean up his act, he just changed his spots for a moment. That's good, because for a few fleeting moments he's on our side, saying what needs to be said. It's good because it shows that this guy with a bionic finger to the wind figures we're winning, and he hopped on the wagon with us.[/quote]
Brett has nailed this one 100 percent. Hatch is wholly untrustworthy, but he is keenly attuned to shifts in the political winds, and if he's jumped over to our side for a while, it's because he sees something that scares him.

(Cue Montgomery Burns voice) Eeeeexcellent.
 
Like Hatch or not. He's said something and seems to be doing something. Now is the time to put more pressure on him to do more, and for our own representatives to do something. It's easier to do something once someone gets the ball rolling.

Let's make this a big ball.
 
I called Hatch's office this morning to thank the senator for his actions and for his bill
to stop the Clinton/S&W extortion. Then I went to the range, and saw two of my shooting buddies. Both of these guys shoot four or more days a week, using every kind of gun imaginable. I spelled out the S&W deal to them, as well as a host of other political/RKBA items. They weren't the least bit interested.

Who am I more ticked off at? Hatch or these two guys?

Dick
 
Back
Top